Comments for August 19

v.13 - As long as I am understanding this verse right, it seems that Jeroboam's’s son was being allowed to die as a reward, so that he would not have to live the rest of his life in such a terrible situation. This was salvation for him by death, a clear example of baptism and what it does for us. Jer.22:10 Rom 6:3-7 2Pet.2:9

v.6 - Ahijah here turns this mission round. Jeroboam's wife had gone to him, but he says that he is 'sent to her' with heavy tidings, showing us that however much we think that the decision to do something might be our own, it is always God's, and if it turns out to be a bad decision, we must learn from it and class the results as chastening. Every decision we make in faith is an opportunity for God to work good in our lives if we let Him.

14:21 Notice that Rehoboam's mother was an Ammonite. So in being king he was in direct violation of the law (Deuteronomy 23:3)

WHICH WAY DO YOU FACE?

God told Jeroboam how he had displeased him. He said, "You have done more evil than all who lived before you. You have made for yourself other gods, idols made of metal; you have provoked me to anger and thrust me behind your back." (1 Kings 14 v 9).

There is a stark contrast here between Jeroboam and David. God describes David as a man "who kept my commands and followed me with all his heart, doing only what was right in my eyes." (v 8)

The way Jeroboam and David faced God tells us a lot about their attitude towards him. For David to follow the LORD with all his heart, meant that his eyes were constantly on the LORD, making sure he was facing in the right direction and moving towards him. Jeroboam, on the other hand, had other things to watch and to follow. He cast the LORD behind his back where he couldn't see him, faced the other way and acted in a way that was wicked.

Which way are we facing? Are our eyes on the LORD, or do we need to turn around again and set our eyes on the one we have cast behind our backs?

:1-2 Jeroboam has not learnt. He tries to deceive the prophet and 'reward' him despite what we learnt yesterday.

14:21 Rehoboam reigned from Jerusalem. It may seem superfluous to say 'the city which the Lord did choose'. However there is good reason for saying this. The kingdom is now divided. God is re stating where His place of worship is.

V.6-8 The message to Jeroboam was forthright and emphatic. It was God who had exalted and crowned him, had made promises to him, and had set before him the example of David his servant All this Jeroboam had rejected. He had rebelled, he had made and worshipped other gods, and had provoked the Lord to anger..

So soon after David and Solomon, Judah turned to idol worship (1Kin 14:22-24).  Solomon had written so many proverbs and wise sayings addressed to "My son", surely Rehoboam had no excuse for allowing the people to leave God in this way.

V.17 Tirzah was located 7 miles (11 km) northeast of Shechem.  Tirzah means full of delight and was a city praised for her beauty by Solomon (Song 6:4).  Tirzah was first conquered in Joshua's time (Josh 12:24).  In Jeroboam's reign (926-909 BC), Tirzah was the capital of the Northern Kingdom.  It continued as capital until half way through Omri's reign (885-874 BC), when he built Samaria to be the new capital (1Kin 16:23,24). 

14:7-8 We maybe tend to think of the northern kingdom of Israel as wholly evil. However God was looking for something better. Jeroboam had been given a wonderful provision in having the kingdom of Israel. Notice he is encouraged to look to David as his role model. As time went on Israel became more and more disconnected from the things of David – and consequently declined even more. The warning for us is clear. Lose contact with the things of the kingdom and disaster will follow inevitably.

14:30 We read of ‘war’ between Israel and Judah as headed up in their respective kings as a matter of fact thing. However Israel and Judah were brethren, inheritance in the land had been given to both groups of tribes. Both groups of tribes were Abraham's children – but despite that they still warred against each other. Unity is a hard thing to achieve – so in the New Testament strife between brethren is a major issue. These things stand as a warning to us today

14:15 God can only be worshipped acceptably in the way that He has Himself laid down. This is a lesson which cannot be too strongly emphasized. The history of apostasy, from Cain until today illustrates this clearly. Every attempt to water down or modify the requirements for acceptable worship, which our Heavenly Father has laid down, leads inevitably to substituting another god for the true God. This is idolatry 

14:24   In speaking of ‘Sodomites in the land’ we see a direct violation of Deut 23:17 so things have deteriorated dramatically after the death of Solomon.

V.4 Ahijah lived in Shiloh, which was about 10 miles (17 km.) north of Bethel.  Israel was, largely, descending into sinful ways.  Nevertheless, Yahweh left His prophet there as His representative. 

And so, those individuals who wished not to follow the evil practices that abounded, had guidance from the prophet.  Likewise, errant ecclesias have always had those of sound faith, who remained, to offer guidance.   

14:1-4 Shiloh was in the northern kingdom. They were astray from God, however there was a prophet of God there. Clearly God had not abandoned them but rather was trying to bring them back to a faithful worship of Him.

1Kin 14:15 First Principles>Kingdom of God>Was overturned>History of fulfilment
4. The Northern Kingdom ended in BC 720 during the reign of Hoshea. The ten tribes went into captivity after Samaria was besieged by Assyria for three years. (Prophesied 1Kin 14:15) 2Kin 17:5,22,23.
Go to Deut 28:49 to see more details of the history of Israel and its overturning.

V.2 Jeroboam was a political animal.  He had set up idolatrous gods to control any movement of Israel towards Judah.  But, now that his son was sick, he wanted to consult the prophet of Yahweh, not useless idols.  However, he did not want to be seen doing so, to maintain the control on Israel’s idolatry, and, hence, its movement.

V.4 Ahijah means worshipper of Jah. It was Ahijah who had informed Jeroboam that he would be king over Israel (1Kin 11:29-31).

V.12 Imagine the anxiety of Jeroboam’s wife in knowing that she would bring the death of her son the moment she entered Shechem.

V.13 Because Yahweh saw some good in Jeroboam’s son, the son would be exempt from the curse of vs.10,11.

V.14 That king would be Baasha (1Kin 15:27). Interestingly, Baasha’s progeny would suffer the same fate as that of Jeroboam ( Compare v.11 with 1Kin 16:4).

Vs.23,24 Homosexuality was forbidden under the Law (Lev 18:22). Idolatry was also forbidden under the Law (Lev 19:4). And so, imagine how disgusting the combination was to Yahweh. 

The sodomites were people who engaged in homosexuality as part of worshipping Baal’s female equivalent, Ashtoreth (Astarte, Ishtar, Venus).  This practice was forbidden under the Law (Deut 23:17).

Vs.26,27 Cheap,  bronze shield replicas replaced the expensive, gold shields of Solomon (see my note on 1 Kings 10, v.17, for August 15).

14:7 We should always remember that the division of the kingdom was ‘of God’ and was a consequence of Solomon’s errors. However the fact that the division was of God was not sufficient reason to cause strife between brethren.

1Kin 14:21-24,31 - Sin and acquaintances who follow other paths can be very enticing, attractive and seductive; Solomon's Ammonite wife "Naamah" [(5277) means "pleasantness, loveliness"] very possibly worshipped "other gods" (1Kin 11:3-5) and possibly helped turn not only Solomon's heart from Yahweh but the heart of her son Rehoboam as well. 

1Kin 14:26-27 - gold which is thought by some to represent "faith tried by affliction and divine character or nature" is replaced by bronze which is thought by some to represent the "corruptible/sinful nature of flesh". Perhaps this change to a baser mixed metal somewhat symbolized the spiritual decline.

14:17   One wonders what she was thinking as the journeyed home. Did she believe the words of the prophet or did she just dismiss his message?  However she felt about him God’s words were fulfilled. Thus it is today. No matter what people think about Bible prophecy the things God has spoken will be fulfilled.

v13. It appears, from this verse, that this child was old enough to have chosen to serve God in some form. How old do you think he was?

v21. That's about 5 years less than Jeroboam reigned.

v31. His mother's nationality is mentioned here a second time, probably indicating that it was her Ammonite influence that ruined Rehoboam's service to God.

Questions: Who were the Ammonites, and should the Israelites have been marrying them? Can you find any prophecies about that nation? Are they generally shown in a good, or a bad light?

14:25   Solomon had made affinity with Egypt by marriage – 1Kin 3:1 – but that affinity was no longer respected by Pharaoh. Such is the way in which the world behaves. Egypt – the world – is not to be trusted!

14:2     Do we think that we can “disguise” ourselves so that God does not know what we are doing?

14:22-24         The behaviour of the people is set against the king reigning in the city of God’s choice – verse :21 – we should note the contrast being drawn. An indication that the people were not interested in God’s kingdom. 

14:4        Eli  had poor eyesight 1Sam 3:2. However there is a contrast between Eli and Ahijah.  Whereas Eli lacked spiritual sight Ahijah did not. We learn that our physical limitations should not diminish our spirituality.

14:4    Ahijah, like Eli who was in Shiloh – was blind. However, unlike Eli whose physical blindness was typical of his spiritual blindness, Ahijah’s physical blindness was contrasted with his spiritual sight.

14:9        Casting God behind our backs is showing that we have no regard for His teaching. We see from Eze 23:35 that when we cast God behind our backs immorality follows. Without God’s constant instruction from His word we will revert to our Adamic behaviour.

14:4    The ark of the covenant had already been removed from Shiloh – 1Sam 4 – and God had forsaken the tabernacle at Shiloh - Psa 78:60 – but Ahijah, a faithful man was there indicating that the place retained some degree of importance in the minds of the people.

14:8      It would seem that if Jeroboam had been faithful his kingdom would have continued with the kings following by descent.

14:19 What an epitaph for Jeroboam – “how he warred”. One would like to think that we might be remembered by God for our peace-making, not our war mongering. As Jesus said “Blessed are the peacemakers” – Matt 5:9

I always wonder why Naamah returned and crossed the threshold. Did she not believe the prophet? Would not returning home have avoided the trigger of the curse and kept him alive?  Regardless, in the end, it would have only delayed death for a more miserable kind for the child.  

14:31 this is the second time in this chapter we are told that Rehoboam’s mother was an Ammonite – see :7. Why are we told this twice? A mother’s influence on her children is well known.  We must conclude that that his upbringing impacted on his behaviour. Rather than criticise Solomon for his choice of wife we do well to reflect what influence we might have on our children .

14:7 Jeroboam was an evil man. However God had given him a task to do. This brought responsibilities that he did not fulfil. Therefore he was punished. In giving him a job to do Yahweh was providing him with an opportunity to turn his life round and start serving Yahweh.

14:3 It is safe to assume that the king, when seeking to know what would happen to the sick child, was anticipating that he could  “bribe” the prophet with the gift he sent with his wife.

Do we every try to “bribe” God with the things we say to Him in prayer?

14:2 A prophet – doubtless not the prophet that witnessed against Bethel –  13:1-2 – had already witnessed against Bethel. Jeroboam sees the need for a word from Yahweh. So he sends for the prophet that had spoken of him becoming king. Doubtless feeling that as he had already had favourable words spoken to him he could expect similar treatment regarding his son. Do we seek for messengers who we think will tell us things we would like to hear?

v.10 refers directly to the language of both a blessing and a curse - Deut 7:13 28:51

v.1-5 This release seems to have been made in recognition of the fact that Jeremiah's prophecy was being fulfilled. Whatever the reason it must have been a great relief to Jeremiah.

40:1 One presumes that Jeremiah was freed because of the way in which he had been encouraging the Jews to go to Babylon. The Babylonians would see Jeremiah as an ally rather than a threat.

:9 Gedaliah's message is one of submission to kings and those in authority - though what he said was viewed as treason.

40:2-3 One wonders how much the Babylonians knew about the purpose of God and the prophecies about the destruction of Jerusalem.

V.5 Gedaliah was well chosen for the position of governor. He was a friend of Jeremiah, and a grandson of Shaphan the scribe who had been such a help to the good king Josiah. (2Kin 22:9) Gedaliah had also held high position as a prince of the realm under Jehoiakim, and was a man of the greatest integrity, one whom Nebuchadnezzar felt he could trust.

V.1 Jeremiah had been bundled off in shackles with the rest of the captives, headed for Babylon.  This was obviously a slip-up by lower echelon soldiers as Nebuchadnezzar had ordered Nebuzaradan to take care of Jeremiah (Jer 39:11,12).  Nebuzaradan realized this mistake and freed Jeremiah at Ramah, not far from Jerusalem. 

Yahweh had a deep purpose with Nebuchadnezzar beyond being an instrument of destruction and captivity for Judah.  Perhaps, Yahweh had shared His purpose with the king, who in turn, showed great respect for Yahweh's servant. 

Vs.2,3 It seems that Nebuzaradan, speaking on behalf of the king, gave a tongue-lashing to the shackled dignitaries of Judah.  Just imagine the irony of the situation: Jeremiah's long, constant prophetical warnings had been spurned by the princes of Judah.  Now, those very men were forced to listen to that truth by their captor.  Jeremiah, who had been imprisoned by the leaders of Judah, was now freed in front of them while they yet remained bound.

I remember someone suggesting that it looks as though Ramah was a holding centre for the captives who were to be taken away to Babylon (Jer 40:1-6). Jeremiah and the others were taken in chains from Jerusalem, but the prophet was released in Ramah.  How true Jeremiah’s prophecy came in Jer 31:15, “A voice was heard in Ramah …Rachel weeping for her children.” Matt 2:16-18 says it came true again when Herod killed the baby boys.

40:5  We should not think that the ‘reward’ that Jeremiah received was some sort of payment in return for encouraging the Jews to accept the Babylonian invasion as being from God. Rather, as the margin shows, the word is ‘allowance’ Jeremiah was provided for by his captives, as in fact were all the captives who were taken into Babylon.

40:9 Gedaliah, it seems, was one of the few who heeded the words of Jeremiah the prophet.

40:3-4 So the witnessing work of Jeremiah is over and so he is freed by a nation who understood better than Israel the reasons for all the evil that had come upon them.

V.11 Most Jews were either killed or taken captive by the Babylonians.  But, there were some who had seen the writing on the wall and had escaped, ahead of time, to other countries. 

The same pattern has existed throughout history.  For example, Jews, who heeded Jesus' warnings, escaped the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD, when approximately 1 million people were killed. 

Yahweh prompted a minority of Jews to leave Europe in the 1930's, before 6 million Jews were killed in the World War 2. 

Yahweh has always preserved a remnant of His people (Psa 106:8).

40:13-16 Gedaliah was too trusting. 2Kin 25:25 records the fact that Gedaliah was slain as he had been warned.

V.14 Ishmael was probably jealous of Gedaliah’s position of being the Governor of Judah. After all, Ishmael was a prince in David’s line (Jer 41:1). Whatever the deal with the king of the Ammonites, Ishmael would govern Judah.

Vs.15,16 Johanan tried to warn Gedaliah of impending trouble, and was prepared to dispense with Ishmael. But, Gedaliah was too trusting, and allowed his assassin to live.

40:9 Sets the scene for this short period in the history of Israel: "do not be afraid to serve the Chaldeans". This is what Jeremiah had been saying all along, but they hadn't listened. And this fear, still very real, manifested itself in Ishmael, son of Nethaniah. He appears to have been of a large family serving the king during Jeremiah's prophecies. His father, grandfather and brothers appear numerous times in the narrative in this role. And 41:1 confirms this, calling him "of the royal family and of the officers of the king". So he and his family had been against Jeremiah's message, and at the forefront of the struggle against Nebuchadnezzar.

The point is that the people couldn't let go of their fear. They had classified Nebuchadnezzar (or Babylon, the Chaldeans) as the enemy, and couldn't let go of the idea. Ishmael was merely an outward manifestation of that fear. He was a remnant of Judah's years long struggle against Babylon. So his actions echoed what they each would have done had they the power or the courage. This is demonstrated in 41:17-18 in their readiness to flee to Egypt, even though Nebuchadnezzar had given them their own land. They didn't, truly, want to submit to him.

How about us? God has made war on our sins, writing at length about them in the word so that we stand condemned. There's no place for us to hide from Him. So do we keep Him as an enemy, or submit to Him (Luke 14:31-32)? Just like Nebuchadnezzar, God is to be feared (Dan 5:19). Yet when we submit He will give us back all we have given up, and more (v9-12). And it is only our fear that will take that away (Luke 19:20-27). Will we allow Him to rule over us?

While Gedeliah's failure to heed the warning may give the impression he was too trusting, the lesson here is that God provided Gedaliah with a warning and Gedeliah failed to act. At a minimum he should have investigated but above all he should have consulted God on the matter. He had Jeremiah there with him, there is no evidence that he sought God's counsel on the matte. Instead he trusted in his own judgement. It was not that he was too trusting of Ishmael, but rather he was too trusting of his own judgement - A deadly failure.

40:7  Not content with rebelling Against God the princes now rebel against the man the king of Babylon had appointed to take care of the land of Israel and what remained of Jerusalem. Thus we see the rebellious nature of His people.

40:4  This offer to Jeremiah is a consequence of the counsel of Nebuchadrezzar as recorded in Jer 39:11-12

40:6  It is evident that Gedaliah listened to the words of Jeremiah so would be an obvious ally with whom to lodge after the first waves of captives were taken away to Babylon.

40:4    The mention of the chains on Jeremiah probably indicate that when he was in the court of the prison the Jews had shackled him also. There is no indication that the Chaldeans had chained him up.

40:8    The reason for the visit to Gedaliah is explained by the way in which the king of Babylon had appointed Gedaliah – 2Kin 25:23

WHO HAS INSIGHT?

I can imagine the priests and leaders of the people of Jerusalem looking over the wall before the city was taken and despising the soldiers who were laying siege to it. In particular they would have despised the commanders of the Babylonian army, and Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard. No doubt they looked down on him as a ruthless and godless gentile, not worthy of the least of God's mercies.

But it was Nebuzaradan, the captain of the Imperial Guard of Babylon whose spiritual insights put all the religious minds of Jerusalem to shame. When he met Jeremiah, he said, "The LORD your God decreed this disaster for this place. And now the LORD has brought it about. He has done just as he said he would. All this happened because you people sinned against the LORD and did not obey him." (Jer 40:2-3). This ruthless, godless gentile believed more truth about God than many of Israel's teachers.

Let's not look down on other people because they don't have the same traditions, values, or even appear to have the same faith or insight as us. Who knows, they might be a Nebuzaradan whose insight from God actually eclipses our own.

40:4    Whilst the king and the princes and false prophets had no choice as to where they lived – they were taken to Babylon – Jeremiah, who seemed to have been in a worse situation being in prison – is given total freedom. God can punish and deliver in ways that seem impossible to man. We should take comfort in that. He is in control and will, in due time, deliver all His children.

40:2-3 Jeremiah had been saying that the Babylonian captivity was due to Israel’ sinfulness. One wonders what he thought when the captain of the guard said the same thing!

40:8       Whilst Johanan was with Ishmael it seems that he dissociated himself from Ishmael when Gedaliah was killed for we see him speaking to Jeremiah afterwards – Jer 43:1-2

OUTLINE OF JEREMIAH

PART TWO -- THE PROPEHCIES TO JUDAH (JEREMIAH 2:1 to 45:5)

IV. The Present Fall of Jerusalem (JEREMIAH 34:1-45:5)

   D. Messages After the Fall (Jeremiah 40:1 to 44-30)

      1. Jer 40:1-16

         a. Jer 40:1-6 - the release of the prophet (as per Jer 40:6 and 39:11-14): V1 "Jeremiah<3414>"; "Ramah<7414>"; VS 1-3 Jeremiah was taken with other prisoners to Ramah and it was there that Nebuzaradan scolded the captured Jews for sinning against the Lord (echoing what Jeremiah had said previously) and then released Jeremiah as Michael Parry noted in his 2004 comments plus in Ramah we have at this time the fulfilment of Jer 31:15 as well as a later fulfilment in Matt 2:16-18 as noted by David Simpson in his 2005 comments; V5 the Jewish "Gedaliah<1436>" son of "Ahikam<296>" son of "Shaphan<8227>" (Jer 40:5;Jer 26:24) was appointed governor over Judah by Nebuchadnezzar but within 3 months he was assassinated (Jer 39:2; 41:1-3); a seal bearing the inscription, "Belonging to Gedaliah, the one who is over the house" was found as part of the burned "Lachish Letters" in 1935 by James Leslie Starkey, of the Wellcome Archaeological Expedition; Shaphan was King Josiah's secretary as John Wilson noted in his 2005 comments (2Kin 22:9;Jer 40:5); VS 5-6 there was protection for Jeremiah if he wished to stay in Babylon but he chose to stay in Israel; V6 the people knew they could trust Gedaliah; V6 "Mizpah<4708>" (earlier mention in Gen 31:47-49).

         b. Jer 40:7-12 - the return of the fugitives: Jaasaniah's/Jezaniah's Seal (Jer 40:8; 2Kin 25:23) was found by W.F. Bade in 1932, in the ruins of Mizpah, it was an agate seal inscribed, "Belonging to Jaazaniah, servant of the king"; V8 Ishmael duped the unsuspecting and trusting Gedaliah (who ignored the warnings of Johanan); V9 Gedaliah did echo Jeremiah's words that if the Jews served the King of Babylon things would go well (see Peter Forbes 2007 comments); VS 10-12 the people gathered very much.

         c. Jer 40:13-16 - the warnings of a plot: Gedaliah was offered protection from his enemies (Jer 40:15) but he rejected it and was murdered (Gedaliah lacked the ability to discern treachery from loyalty and relied on his own faulty judgment despite being warned) in Jer 41:2.

40:7-8  The historical record in 2Kin 25:23-25 fills out details of what is recorded here.

40:9       When Gedaliah encourages the people with “it shall be well with you” he is re-iterating the words of Jeremiah which were said in the same context –  38:20.

40:7 It would seem that Gedaliah had been placed in charge because the Babylonians knew that he supported the words of Jeremiah which encouraged submission to the Chaldeans. However Gedaliah now became a target for those who thought they were loyal to Israel.

40:1 there are a number of different ways in which we might divide Jeremiah into sections. One is the recurring phrase “The word that came to Jeremiah” of which there are seven occasions Jer 7:1, 11:1, 25:1, 30:1, 32:1, 40:1 and Jer 44:1.This division might help in our seeking for a structure in the prophecy of Jeremiah which certainly is not recorded in chronological order.

40:9 there is always value in repeating things which we hear which are right and true in the way that Gedaliah did here.  Sadly we may be  too quick to repeat unhelpful gossip and scandal rather than we are to speak about the wonders of the scriptures. That we have seen ourselves or been told by others. 

40:1  Ramah, it seems, was a staging post where captives were brought before being taken on to Babylon by the Chaldeans as they captured different towns and cities in the land.

That is why there was “weeping at Ramah” – Jer 31:3.

40:9-10 Gedaliah’s willingness to dwell at Mizpah and serve the Chaldeans, whilst running contrary to man’s notions of patriotism was exactly what God was looking for form men and women that wanted to serve Him.  Are we patriots to man’s values or the values of our heavenly Father?

v.32 - Gethsemane was an olive-yard at the foot of the mount of Olives. Olive trees of a great age (though not verifiable) still grow there today. It seems that Jesus left the disciples in this olive-yard - in the care of the house of Israel, as it were, while he went outside that care to communicate with his Father, acting, as he was, on behalf of all, not just Israel. v.33-35 Matt.26:36-39

:37 Jesus seems distressed that the disciples were not able to stay awake whilst he was praying - even though they had no idea what he was praying about or what was going to happen next. David 'looked for comforters and found none' [Psalm 69:20] and was distressed by this also. Have we thought about how we can support our brethren and sisters in their tribulation even if we do not fully understand their dilemma? It would seem that the simple presence of the disciples - or in David's case his friends - would have provided some form of sustenance.

:36 In saying 'not what I will but what thou wilt' Jesus' thoughts echo David's (2 Samuel 15:25) when he was fleeing from Jerusalem when Absalom tried to take the throne.

The comments of certain disciples in v4-5 are interesting. This event of the "wasting" of money seems to have been the final straw for Judas, who went and betrayed Jesus immediately in v10. From this, I assume Judas was the one who made the comment in v4. I wonder whether such comments betray an inner secret, which is that we care about money too much? It certainly did in the case of Judas. How often do we ourselves criticise the use of the ecclesia's funds, even when they are being used in a worthwhile cause?

A further point to ponder:

In v34 Jesus was "exceedingly sorrowful even unto death". This wording is very helpful, because it makes the link between this struggle of Jesus in Gethsemane, and Hebrews 12, which speaks of the chastening of the Lord. The link is in Hebrews 12v4 "you have not yet resisted unto bloodshed, striving against sin". Jesus resisted (or strove against) sin, even unto death, and unto bloodshed - but where did he do it? It was in the garden, where his sweat came as "great drops of blood" (Luke 22v44). This struggle of Jesus was designed by God to perfect him, as it says in Hebrews 12v10-11.

14:1 Whilst John John 12:2-10 seems to imply that Jesus was anointed in Bethany six days before the Passover Mark tells us it was two days before the Passover, as does Matt 26:2-14. It seems that the meal at Bethany which was designed by the sisters to celebrate the raising of Lazarus was not held until Jesus had finished his public ministry.

V.36 We see the complete submission of Christ to His Father's will. "Remove this cup from me." is immediately modified by "nevertheless, not what I will but what thou wilt" What a lesson for all of us, our prayers are answered, but not always the way we want, it must be according to our Heavenly Father's will.

V.53 The ruling Council of the Jews (the Sanhedrin) was made up seventy-one of the richest, most powerful elite of society. They were mainly Sadducees, although some prominent Pharisees were among them. 

Vs.63,64 Under the direction of the high priest, the Council unanimously condemned Jesus to death, although they were not allowed to execute anyone (John 18:31). 

Joseph of Arimathea (Mark 15:43) and Nicodemus (John 3:1) were members of the Sanhedrin.  However, they must have proclaimed their faith in Jesus before this event, otherwise they would have been counted in the unanimous decision of the council. 

They would have given up great wealth and power to follow their master, and would have certainly been shunned, lost wealth and power; and would probably have been persecuted by the council.  Their faith is recorded as they cared for the body of the Lord (John 19:38-40).

V.15 "upper room" This room would have been the perfect place for such a gathering. It would have been relatively free from any disturbance; a place for discussion, fellowship, meditation, and prayer. It was furnished and ready for the feast.

V.65 Jesus would have had a full beard as was the custom of the Israelites.  Under the Law, the beard must not have its edges clipped (Lev 19:27).  The Jews abused Jesus while in their custody. 

One of the abuses was that they plucked out His beard (Isa 50:6).  This was contrary to the Law and constituted a great insult (just like Hanun's treatment of David's servants) (2Sam 10:4,5).  

Such was the disdain that the Jewish leaders had for Jesus, that by plucking out his beard, contrary to the Law, they were saying that He had no part in Israel.

14:23 Notice Jesus took the 'cup' on every occasion when the last supper is described it is always the cup, not the wine, that is spoken of. A review of the way that there is a cup of wrath and a cup of blessing explains what Jesus is doing. He is stressing the two options open to the disciple.

V.40 As we read this verse, we see the power of prayer. Even Peter, James, and John have become weary and have left Jesus alone, his only source of support or strength is now prayer. How often do we find ourselves in a situation when we think that we are alone, no one to turn to for support. We must always be fully aware of, and use the power of prayer.

14:4-6 The beautiful odour of the ointment was marred by the dissention amongst the disciples, fuelled by Judas. In fact Judas was like the ‘Dead files’ which mar the ointment of the apothecary -Ecc 10:1

V.9 Jesus said that the incident described in v.3 would be known throughout the world wherever the gospel is spread. Jesus here links the gospel to the reading of the Word. How else would people know about this event unless they read about it in the Bible? How else would people understand the gospel message unless they look into the Scriptures?

14:12   That the next day is mentioned in details as the ‘first day of unleavened bread’ confirms that the meal in Bethany when Jesus was anointed was two days before the Passover even though John 12:1 – seems to indicate that meal took place six days before the Passover.

14:11 That the chief priests were ‘glad’ was not simply because Judas had offered to betray Jesus. After all they could see Jesus every day. They knew who he was. Their joy was doubtless because Judas had told them that they would be able to take Jesus when there was no one around if they were willing to pay him money

Vs.3,10 There is a chance that Judas was Simon the leper’s son.  For the possible connection, see my note on Matt 26, for Jan 4.

V.5 Three hundred pence (denarii) amounted to one year’s wages for a labourer (Matt 20:2).

V.32 Gethsemane comes from an Aramaic word meaning oil press.  It was located on the lower slope of the Mount of Olives, opposite the Kidron valley.

14:24 When the law was given Moses sprinkled the people saying ‘this is the blood of the covenant’ – Exo 24:8 – Jesus adds the word ‘new’ when speaking of the breaking of bread. The word ‘new’ takes one back to Jer 31:31blending together the old and new with the forgiveness of sins.

I have always assumed Jesus took the last supper with just the twelve present. But notice the two in v13 are not part of the twelve in v16-17. So there were at least two more. Also v15 it was a large room. Bear in mind Jesus was able to recline at the table with the twelve even in a normal dining room (e.g v3), so why the large room? Thirdly, there are many occasions when Jesus was with a multitude yet spoke specifically to the twelve as they were closest to him, so there's no need to assume from v17-20 that there were only the twelve with him.

14:14   The ‘guestchamber’ <2464> is the same word translated ‘inn’ – Luke 2:7 when speaking of the birth of Jesus. There are a number of links between the birth and death of Jesus in the gospel records. You might care to look for them in your reading.

14:58 Whilst there is no record of Jesus ever saying he would build the temple ‘without hands’ these words are a lovely description of God’s work in Christ and take up the idea found in Dan 2:45.

14:45 When Judas betrayed Jesus with a ‘kiss’ the Greek means ‘kissed much’ which picks up the prophecy – Prov 27:6 – about the betrayal of a friend.

14:65  We should not underestimate what the Lord Jesus was going through here.  According to Strong, <2852> the word translated “buffet” means to rap with the fist – or in other words, Jesus was punched.  We read that this took place whilst his head was covered, so he was unable to see the blows coming and move his head in such a way as to absorb some of the power of the blows.

The parallel account in Luke(Luke 22:64) tells us that Jesus was blindfolded, then “struck”.  When we again investigate this word <5180> we see that it could mean that Jesus was beaten with sticks or cudgels.

Interestingly, the northern English dialect word “to tup” meaning to head-butt someone may possibly have its distant ancestry in the Greek word used by Luke: tuptoo

After the resurrection, it’s possible that the disciples’ inability to recognise Jesus, with whom they’d spent three years (Luke 24:36-38) was because his face was still so bruised and disfigured.

14:17  Jesus had doubtless noticed that none of the disciples took upon them the servant role of washing feet. Maybe they thought about it, maybe they did not. However their unwillingness to take the role of a servant meant that they needed a lesson. Jesus gave that lesson a little later when he washed their feet – John 13:14

14:8    We should not assume that Jesus said that the anointing was done against his burial to silence the woman’s critics. We should assume that she had a deeper understanding than many about what was going to happen to her lord Jesus.

14:61  In saying that Jesus “held his peace” we see a fulfilment of Isa 53:7.  But consider also Psalm 39:2 and in particular the end of the verse which shows Jesus’ feeling at the time of the trials.

14:34                The way in which the record says Jesus was “sorrowful unto death” draws on the words of the Messianic Psalm – Psa 116:3

14:1-2  It seems that there had been previous occasions when the leaders would have captured Jesus had it not been for the people. But now there seems to be an urgency in their planning. Unbeknown to them Jesus had to die this passover time and so events conspire to bring about the fulfilment of prophecy.

Mark 14:30

“And Jesus saith unto him, Verily I say unto thee, That this day, even in this night, before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice.”

In Matt 26:34, Mark 14:68, Luke 22:34, John 13:38, all lack the cock crowing twice. A cock’s crowing could last as long as five minutes and occurred at all hours throughout the day. Cicero wrote: “Is there any time, night or day, that cocks do not crow?” It is the “second” cock crowing that was associated with the dawn, the first occurring in the middle of the night. “Finally, on a previously appointed festal day, he ascended Mount Casius, a wooded hill rising on high with a rounded contour, from which at the second cock-crow [secundis galliciniis] the sun is first seen to rise.” Ammianus Marcellinus, Roman antiquities, Book XXII. 14.4 (emphasis added).

“There is no contradiction between the record of Mark (‘Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice’), and that of Luke, (‘The cock shall not crow this day before that thou shalt thrice deny, etc.’). It is simply this, that the first statement is fuller than the second. The ‘crow’ of Luke is indefinite, and may mean one crow or a hundred. ‘Crow twice’ is precise. The ‘crow twice’ of Mark shows the exact extent of the ‘crow’ of Luke. ‘And immediately while he (Peter) yet spake, the cock crew’ (Luke 22:60). That is, the second time (Mark 14:72).”

Robert Roberts, Christadelphian, 1882, p. 219

SOME SLY WAY

No one else may know about them, but some of our most embarrassing and regrettable moments would have to be times when we are alone, in secret or trying to hide.

The chief priests and teachers of the Law were the same in Jesus' day. Of all the regrettable moments they had in the past, they were about to top it off by arresting and killing the Son of God. Take note of how it happened: "...the chief priests and teachers of the Law were looking for some sly way to arrest Jesus and kill him." (Mark 14:1). Then later on, when they had done the deal with Judas, it was the middle of the night, in the dark, when they went out as a mob to arrest Jesus.

There are a couple of warning bells for us here. If we find ourselves doing anything secretly, slyly, by stealth or in a hidden place under the cover of darkness, or even in a room with the door shut, take a conscience check. All too often our secret things are sinful things. And even if we are doing them "for the good of the people," we are probably going about them the wrong way.

Like Jesus, let's make sure our words and actions are honest, out in the open and done with a clean conscience.

 

Mark 14:12-24

The account of Christ’s last meal with his apostles is strikingly simple and solemn and ordained to continually remind us of Christ’s sacrifice. With the passing of time and little by little, this simple meal in a simple room became corrupted beyond recognition. Roman Catholicism refers to this event as Christ’s instituting of the Most Holy Eucharist, a.k.a. Holy Communion.

Ignatius (110 A.D.) had this to say, “The Eucharist is the flesh of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which flesh suffered for our sins.”

Justin Martyr (150 A.D.) wrote, “We do not receive them as ordinary food, or ordinary drink, but as by the word of God, Jesus Christ our Saviour was made flesh, and had both flesh and blood for our salvation; so also, the food which was blessed by the prayer of the word which proceeded from him and from which our flesh and blood, by assimilation, receive nourishment, is we are taught, both the flesh and blood of that Jesus who was made flesh.”

Irenaeus (175 A.D.) wrote, “For as the bread which is from the earth, on receiving the invocation of God is no longer common bread, but Eucharist, consisting of two things, an earthly and a spiritual, so our bodies, by partaking of the Eucharist, are no longer corruptible, in that they have a hope of resurrection.”

By the third century more alterations were introduced to the memorial meal. Pomp and ceremony were introduced with silver and gold vessels used in its celebration, and the desire for outward show increased as the years rolled by. The “large upper room” in which the early disciples met were no longer suitable and led to the building of cathedrals and abbeys of such stunning architecture, which the world is full of today.

By the fourth century the Eucharistic sacrifice was regarded as helping people out of purgatory, an intermediary place for penance before going to heaven!

By the ninth century the simple memorial feast had almost disappeared, the doctrine of transubstantiation openly declared throughout Christendom. The elements of the bread and wine were considered changed into the actual body and blood of Christ by the mystical power of the priests. Throughout the Dark Ages which followed, superstition and corruptions abounded, until those who dared to protest against such corruption were silenced by being put to death by any and every devilish device the priesthood could invent.

By the sixteenth century there were several attempts to reform Roman Catholicism, such as Peter Waldo and John Wycliffe, but it wasn’t until Martin Luther with his ninety-five theses did the Reformation, or Protestant Reformation, come into full swing. King Henry VIII dispute with the Pope over divorce, led the Pope to excommunicate the whole of Great Britain, the outcome of which the King of England became head of the Church of England. The Papacy was losing its grip on the people. Monasteries were closed down, revenues to the Pope discontinued, Roman statues and images were removed from the church, Latin mass was abolished and declared the sacrifice of the mass as being blasphemous fables and dangerous deceits.

By the nineteenth century the Roman doctrine of transubstantiation was again slowly, but surely, foisted on the people. It is known as the Oxford Movement started under the auspices of Catholic priests of the Church of England, like John Henry Newman, known today as Cardinal Newman. They sought to restore the Church of England to its Catholic heritage. This movement spread and what was forbidden by law during the Reformation became law again. Despite the complaints and appeals of other denominations, lawlessness increased. Iniquity waxed worse and worse, and Christ’s simple memorial feast corrupted beyond all recognition continues to this day (cf. Gal 1:6-10).

14:5  Doubtless the murmuring lasted a few minutes. Started by Judas it was fuelled by comments from the other disciples. And their murmuring was “against her”. The use of the words “murmured against” catches the repeated refrain form the time of the wilderness journey – Exo 15:24, Exo 16:2, Exo 17:3, Num 16:41

14:68-72 Peter’s threefold denial of Jesus – even though he was wanted he would do that stands as a stark warning to us. We might think we are confident in our allegiance to Jesus. Peter, however, shows us that great confidence can easily be damaged by the simplest and least threatening thing. We must be careful not to boast, even to ourselves, of our strengths.

14:3 the blessings of oil poured on Jesus’ head echoes the way the Psalmist spoke – Psa 141:3.

14:1 The rulers had been seeking to put Jesus to death for most of the las three years but had not managed to do so. It seems that their endeavours become even more intense now. Of course God had already determined that Jesus would die as the passover lamb at passover time. Whilst the Jews had been plotting for some time God was in control of events.

14:3 The way in which Simon is identified would imply that by the time that Mark’s gospel record was circulating Simon’s identity would be well know and even if those who had not met him read the record they would know who was being spoken of. So we might conclude that he had become a well known person early in the first century by the time the gospel records were circulating. A further indication that the gospel records were available very early in the first century.

14:11 Notice they “promised” to give money. The record does not say they gave him money at that time as a “part payment”. So we might presume that the money was handed over some time after Jesus was captured.